You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 5. Group processes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, December 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-4-17 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Atle Fretheim, Holger J Schünemann, Andrew D Oxman |
| Abstract |
The World Health Organization (WHO), like many other organisations around the world, has recognised the need to use more rigorous processes to ensure that health care recommendations are informed by the best available research evidence. This is the fifth of a series of 16 reviews that have been prepared as background for advice from the WHO Advisory Committee on Health Research to WHO on how to achieve this. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 3% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Peru | 2 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 1% |
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 81 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 22 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 23% |
| Unknown | 7 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 54% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Psychology | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 13 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 August 2019.
All research outputs
#2,574,449
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#379
of 1,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,941
of 158,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,238 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 158,379 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.